Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (254437)	10/9/2005 10:25:36 AM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571808

There are plenty of organizations which will do what you advocate. Did you know that?

To: bentway who wrote (254437)	10/9/2005 10:58:56 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571808

My own feeling is that anyone that wants to make an issue of a woman's right to choose should pick the woman and the child they want to assume responsibility for, support the woman through term, paying for everything, then adopt the baby as their own. It's just what they're demanding the woman in question do. If that was the deal, I think support for the "pro-life" position would plunge precipitously. I agree to a degree. Months ago I was saying that the "pro-life" people should advocate government funds for development of machines that remove a fetus after the minimum number of weeks, funds for the surgery to remove it, funds for the support for the fetus until it can survive on its own and funds for the orphanages/adoption service that would result. If they want to ban abortions, they should advocate maintenance of the unwanted child government's responsibility. In fact, those costs should be included with any state supported anti-abortion law. Lets see that pass. If they (as in the voters) aren't willing to pay the cost of ourlawing abortion then they should pipe down.